Hampton Roads military: Pentagon defends need to close military bases

The Pentagon on Wednesday made its case for a new round of politically unpopular base closings, saying it makes sense to shutter installations in an era of post-war downsizing.

The last base-closing round in 2005 hit throughout Hampton Roads, closing Fort Monroe in Hampton, changing the makeup of Fort Eustis in Newport News and threatening the future of Naval Air Station Oceana in Virginia Beach. It also resulted in a pair of joint base managing partnerships.

Much of the current opposition in Congress stems from that 2005 effort, known formally as Base Realignment and Closure, or BRAC. It ended up costing $35 billion compared to the original estimate of $21 billion.

Appearing before a skeptical Senate panel, a deputy Pentagon official said much of what happened in 2005 wasn't designed to save money. He admitted that seems to go against the nature of BRAC.

"To the casual observer, this makes no sense," said John C. Conger, a Pentagon acting deputy undersecretary.

However, the Pentagon used the 2005 process to redistribute forces and functions in a way that would have been difficult outside a formal BRAC process. Of that $35 billion cost, more than $29 million was related to transformation and saved little, Conger said. The "efficiency" part of BRAC cost $6 billion and resulted in an annual savings of $3 billion.

For 2017, the Obama administration wants an efficiency-oriented BRAC, not a transformational one, Conger said.

Army and Air Force officials offered strong support for another BRAC round.

The active-duty Army stands at 523,000 and expects to shrink to 490,000 by September 2015. At that lower number, the Army will have 18 percent excess capacity, said Katherine G. Hammack, an assistant secretary of the Army. The cost of maintaining empty spaces could total $500 million a year, she said.

That wasteful spending will force cuts elsewhere in the budget, she said.

Military regions like Hampton Roads won't be spared pain even without BRAC, she said, because bases will be smaller, with fewer soldiers and their families spending money in the community.

"Without BRAC, communities hosting our highest military value installations are likely to see greater negative economic impacts than they would if the Army could close or realign some installations," she said.

Kathleen Ferguson, an acting assistant Air Force secretary, said the 2005 BRAC round resulted in relatively small cuts. Since then, the Air Force has cut its ranks by 8 percent and cut 500 aircraft. It is spending money on excess infrastructure that could be used on weapons, training or improved quality of life for personnel, she said.

"Divestiture of excess property on a grander scale is a must," she said.

Dennis McGinn, an assistant Navy secretary, said the Navy also supported President Barack Obama's request for another BRAC. McGinn devoted most of his prepared testimony to showing how the Navy saved money under previous BRAC rounds.

Virginia leaders, both in Congress and Hampton Roads, oppose another BRAC round. Members of the Senate panel Wednesday also expressed disappointment that Obama is pushing to close bases.

Last month, a Virginia military commission turned that argument around. It said the state should embrace BRAC because it might allow the Pentagon to consolidate assets within the state. Also, cuts are on the way with or without a formal BRAC process, and that could lead to downsizing without public input and with little notice.